Letters: Refuting BLT claims on marina

Published 7:25 pm, Friday, August 30, 2013

In (an Aug. 21) Letter to the Editor, John Freeman, attorney for BLT, distorts the facts surrounding the destruction of Yacht Haven Marina and replacing it with an unwanted and unworkable marina on Magee Avenue, declaring that "the boat yard use (Yacht Haven Marina) can be modified based on four criteria." His points are easily refuted by the following facts:

1. The Office of Long Island Sound Programs and the Connecticut Department of Environmental Protection are entities put in place to protect the Long Island Sound and preserve its facilities and unique shoreline, not to support the destruction of one of its most significant marinas. I, and many others, detect enormous pressure placed on these organizations by various governmental and business "enterprises" to serve their own needs.

2. Reference to the Connecticut Coastal Area Management Act mentions "claims to be supported by full disclosure." This disclosure will be prepared by BLT and will most certainly not contain objective information but only to support the goal of destroying Yacht Haven Marina and replacing it with the "Bridgewater Harbor" office building.

4. "The applicant submits a professionally prepared market study." What, may we conclude, the applicants market study will show -- exactly what the applicant wishes the study to show.

John Freeman has appeared before various Stamford Boards with his comments and conclusions which, on their face, are patently distorted.

It should be further noted that an approval of the Bridgewater building will give BLT a windfall of over $150,000,000 which I hope to explain in future letters.

William Wagner

Stamford

Kudos to animal control

To the editor:

I am writing this in response to an all-spring and summer episode at Cummings Beach. I had been feeding a nesting geese couple since spring almost every day. During this nesting time, I noticed the male goose returned to the nest with monofilm wrapped around his right leg. He kept trying to shake it off to no avail. I called animal control and they tried numerous times to get him but had no luck.

As time went on I continued to feed the family, his leg kept getting worse. His leg got very swollen and eventually his foot also got swollen and he was limping. He was soon unable to use the leg and/or foot at all, only being able to stand on one leg. Because he knew me, he let me get close to him to hand-feed him, otherwise the other geese and birds would swoop in and he was unable to get any food. Meanwhile animal control kept trying numerous times but were unable to net him.

When I went to feed him a week ago Monday his bottom leg had fallen off and he was in real trouble. I called animal control and we worked together, me feeding him and they ready to get him, which of course they did. I have the utmost respect for animal control. They were there every step of the way.

Notice to fisherman. This animal suffered unbearable pain because of the monofilm. Please don't throw it in the water. I doubt any of you would want any of your animals to suffer the spring and summer, as this one did.